4 ms·
The prospect of changing something is often what attracted the founders to the idea in the first place. The most successful founders are not usually in it just
by pg 13y ago
The prospect of changing something is often what attracted the founders to the idea in the first place. The most successful founders are not usually in it just for the money. If they were they'd have taken that $50 million acquisition offer on the way up.
- jayp 13y agoWhile I agree with your premise, the didn't-take-early-offer-and-run seems doesn't provide strong enough evidence. For a super successful startup (a la dropbox, stripe, etc.) -- why take only $50 million and leave the rest (possibly hundreds of millions) on the table? Especially with investors chewing their ears out about going for the home run. And, possibly, with an opportunity to cash out partially (a la Groupon, airbnb, etc.)
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- enraged_camel 13y agoIn my (admittedly limited) experience, the main reason founders refuse acquisition offers is because they believe their startup has a great future and will be worth a lot more later. I don't think the thought process is ever, "Well, $50 million is great, but you know what? We're enjoying what we do so much that we'll turn it down even though that's the most we will realistically be able to get."
- staunch 13y agoOr even more simply, their investors offer to let them to cash out a few million worth of shares as idiot insurance. This still doesn't really explain why a 22 year old Mark Zuckerberg had the cojones to turn down $1 billion. Very few people in the world would have done that.
- nomedeplume 13y agoDoesn't this contradict your theory that people should start a startup so they get a lifetimes worth of work done in a few years?